While a
large majority of both Jewish and Arab Israelis favor conducting peace talks,
most Israeli Jews think it would be a mistake for their country to follow
Kerry’s advice and withdraw almost completely from the West Bank and dismantle
many settlements, even if the Jewish state were allowed to retain most of the
major settlement blocs:

The
poll … found that 63 percent of Jews in Israel oppose a withdrawal to the 1967
lines with land swaps as part of any peace arrangement with the Palestinian
Authority, even if it meant Israel would hold onto the Etzion Bloc, directly
south of Jerusalem; Ma’aleh Adumim, east of the capital; and Ariel in the central
West Bank about 34 kilometers (21 miles) east of Tel Aviv. Assuming Israeli
retention of Ariel, Ma’aleh Adumim and other settlement blocs, 58% of Jewish
respondents were opposed to the dismantling of other settlements.

The
poll was conducted among 602 respondents in late July, after the announcement
of new peace talks with the Palestinians, and has a statistical error of 4.5%.
According to the survey, 50% of Jewish Israelis also oppose the transfer of
Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem to Palestinian Authority control with a special
arrangement for Jewish holy sites.

These
results, which seemingly contradict other surveys that show that a majority
would back a peace deal if it were put to a referendum, will doubtlessly be
interpreted in some quarters as evidence that proves Israelis really don’t want
peace. But all these numbers tell us is that most Israelis have a better
understanding of Palestinian political culture than Kerry, Friedman, or
Ignatius. Though the desire for peace in Israel remains high, if most there
don’t think territorial withdrawals are a good idea, it’s because they have no
faith in the willingness of the Palestinians to make peace or to abstain from
violence even if an accord was signed.

Let’s
start by noting that most Israelis find it impossible to forget something that
the peace processers keep trying to flush down the memory hole: the
Palestinians have already rejected Israeli offers of statehood and withdrawal
from almost all of the West Bank three times. With Hamas still in control of
Gaza, the notion that a weak Mahmoud Abbas would accept a deal that the more
powerful Yasir Arafat refused requires a leap of faith that most sensible
people are unable to make.

But
even if we leave aside that natural skepticism, why wouldn’t most Israelis
accept such withdrawals in exchange for a peace agreement? Aren’t they
persuaded by demographic arguments that claim that a continuation of the status
quo will ultimately compromise Israel’s Jewish majority? And don’t they think
the country would be more secure if it had an internationally recognized border
that kept most of the Palestinian Arabs outside of the Jewish state?

Most
Israelis would probably be happier if there were no demographic threat, even if
the predictions of doom might be exaggerated. There’s also no question that
they desire peace as ardently as those who think the country must be saved from
itself.

But the
problem is that, unlike Kerry, Friedman, and Ignatius, they also remember what
happened when their country withdrew every settlement, soldier, and individual
Jew from Gaza. The result was the creation of a terror state on their doorstep
and few in Israel want to risk repeating that mistake in the far more strategic
West Bank. Simply put, they don’t trust Abbas and his Fatah Party, which
demanded the release of terrorists with blood on their hands as the price for
the privilege of negotiating with them and continues to laud murderers of Jews
as heroes in their official media, to make peace. If a majority thinks creating
a sovereign state largely along the 1967 lines where Israeli forces could not
enter is a mistake, it’s because their experience teaches them that doing so
would be an invitation to more violence. Similarly, the lack of enthusiasm for
dividing Jerusalem must be seen as a vote of no confidence in the willingness
of the PA to not use their foothold in the city to unleash a new wave of violence.

That
said, I still think that if Abbas were to actually sign a peace deal
recognizing the legitimacy of a Jewish state and giving up the “right of
return” for the descendants of the 1948 Arab refugees, a majority of Israelis
might vote to approve such an agreement even if it included the withdrawals
that most now think would be foolish. But since few believe Abbas can do that,
talk about giving up territory merely for the sake of an accord that seems a
pipe dream is inevitably seen as quixotic.

This
poll should serve as a reminder that the calls for Israel to take great risks
in the name of peace in the absence of any indication the other side means
business are bound to fall on deaf ears. Neither Prime Minister Netanyahu nor
his people are likely to be scared into making such sacrifices by threats of
future Palestinian violence, as Ignatius thinks is Kerry’s plan. In the absence
of a genuine sea change in Arab political culture that would enable Abbas to
credibly pledge to keep the peace, a majority of Israelis obviously think they
are better off not weakening their security. If Israelis are largely immune to
peace process enthusiasm, it is because they understand their antagonists a lot
better than many Americans do.